Then all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together, and came to Samuel to Ramah,
All the elders of Israel travel to Samuel's home town, and a routine-looking meeting turns into a turning point in the nation's history. Why did they come, and what were they really asking for?
Samuel was growing old, and he had put his own sons in the judge's seat. One writer finds the fault in the way he made that appointment:
The history of the judges, like that of the priesthood, ends in complete ruin. Here Samuel lacks spiritual discernment. He makes his sons judges without any direction from the Lord. He acts as if the work God had entrusted to him could be handed on to others. But no gift, and not even an office, passes down by succession.
Another writer ties that mistake to what the elders did next:
Yet Samuel meant well. Remember: the people belonged to God, not to Samuel... The sin of the people in asking for a king is obvious. But we must not forget that the error of the man of God helped to cause it.
The elders had a real complaint. Their mistake was where it sent them:
The elders of Israel are right to disapprove of the conduct of Samuel's sons (v. 4). But they use it to ask for a king (v. 5): "Appoint us a king to judge us, like all the nations." The evil they complained of does not push them toward the Lord. It pushes them toward the other nations. They look for human help to cure man's ruin, thinking that in this way they can escape their own misery as God's people.
Their reasoning still repeats itself among God's people:
Their one argument was that other nations had kings: why not them? God's people often sink to this level. Instead of leaning on the leading and grace of God, they watch what others are doing. They see some results on the surface, and then decide what to do by outward appearances. This is not faith.
But was the conduct of the sons their real reason? One writer finds the excuse hollow:
It was only a poor, miserable excuse... They made his sons the stated cause of their discontent, though they must have known that bribery of the courts was as common as could be in the pagan kingdoms around them. A king was no cure and no safeguard against bribery in the courts!
The elders came with a complaint about judges. God saw something far larger:
By this demand they had rejected the Lord their God. He brought them out of the land of Egypt, and He saved them again and again out of all their troubles. So they were not only setting aside Samuel, their faithful guide; they were setting aside their God... From now on Israel was to be "like all other nations." But it is always sadly true that God's people prefer to walk on lower ground than the ground God has marked out for them.
Yet God's word to Samuel carried comfort:
This was precious encouragement from God to His servant. It came at the very moment when Samuel was going through a discipline, and the elders of Israel had become the instrument of it. Nothing could comfort his heart more than the assurance that he was, after all, on the Lord's side... It is better to be a humbled Samuel, ignored, alone with a rejected God, than an Israel armed with a powerful outward organization. That organization only gives them the illusion that they can do without God.
Samuel defended neither his family nor his arrangement:
He said not one resentful word about the charges made against his sons. He made no effort to prop up the arrangement he had so wrongly set up. "Samuel prayed to the Lord." How different everything would have been if he had prayed before he made his sons judges.
Behind the whole sad scene, another writer sees God already at work:
So the thought of a king did not come from man, but from God. Yet man's desire for a king like the nations was rebellion against God. The king God planned would be a rich blessing from Him. He purposed to give them a king before their wicked heart wanted one in order to be rid of Him. The evil in man was to be judged. The purpose in God was grace, and He will surely carry it out. Both are true. But man's mind often sets one against the other, instead of believing both.
- Cause. Samuel made his sons judges without any word from God. Commentators say this error helped open the door the elders walked through.
- Complaint. Their complaint was real, but it drove them toward the nations instead of toward the Lord. That is sight, not faith.
- Cover. The sons were only the stated cause. A king would not have cured bribery. The real wish was a government like the nations had.
- Core. The elders set aside not the prophet but God Himself. He told Samuel so, and tied His servant to Him in the rejection.
- Counter-plan. God had planned a king before man ever asked for one. Man's rebellion and God's grace stand together here, and both are true.
and said to him, Behold, thou art become old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways now appoint us a king to judge us, like all the nations.
Israel's elders come to Samuel with a complaint that is true. He is old, and his sons take bribes. Then they add a demand that changes their history: give us a king. Two questions follow. Why did a real grievance lead to this cure? And why did God take the demand as aimed at Himself?
The elders' facts were true. But the excuse they built on those facts did not hold.
A poor excuse is really worse than none — especially the kind Israel's elders make here before their honoured Chief Justice. It would have been better to say plainly that they were not unhappy with how Samuel governed, but with the form of government itself... They made his sons the apparent cause of their discontent. Yet they must have known how common bribery in the courts was in the Gentile kingdoms around them. A kingly form of government was no safeguard against judges taking bribes!
The reason the elders gave was not their real one. Fear of an enemy was driving them.
Here the Spirit uncovers their hidden motives for asking for a king. Deep down, it was not the reason they had given to Samuel: "Behold, you are old and your sons do not walk in your ways." People often colour their motives in the eyes of others this way, but they cannot hide them from God or from His prophet. Fear of Nahash, and simply that, ruled in the depths of Israel's heart, together with a complete lack of faith and confidence in God.
They did not just ask for a king. They asked for a king of a certain kind, and that is where the sin lay.
Their desire for a king really meant giving up the Lord. It denied His direct rule through the judges. But their greatest sin was asking for a king like the nations. Was it not God's counsel to give them a king according to His own heart, an Anointed whom He would have chosen for them Himself? In wanting a king like all the nations, they gave up their title as God's people. It meant becoming like the world.
God's law had already made room for a king. So what went wrong was not the kingship itself.
God, in the law, had made provision for a king in Israel (see Deuteronomy 17:14-20). Had they waited in faith, God might have raised up a king of His own providing when Samuel died. That would have been David, "a man after His own heart" — a model prince, and a picture of Him who is both "King of Israel" and "Prince of peace." But no. They could not wait, they would not listen to advice, and so God gave them their desire. But "sudden decisions and hasty desires make work for sore and slow repentance."
Samuel took the matter to God. God's answer moved the offence off Samuel onto Himself. Giving them what they asked was no kindness.
Outwardly they complained about the misrule of Samuel's sons. But when the prophet sadly told God of their demand, He showed Samuel where the real trouble lay. It was in their hearts. They were finding God's rule a burden. As He said to Samuel: "they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me from being king over them." Had they only asked for a king like Moses, God would surely have been pleased. But no — "like all the nations" was what they wanted. Long afterwards we read, "I gave you a king in my anger, and I took him away in my wrath."
The demand hurt Samuel himself. What he did next is the example to copy.
Samuel feels it deeply. It was not so much against himself as against God, and so he tells them the thing displeased him. "And Samuel prayed." May we follow the example of so true a servant of the Lord! When things displease us, may we pray, and not fret or fume or scold.
- Excuse. The complaint was true. But the cure did not fit it. The nations they wanted to copy had courts just as corrupt.
- Motive. Behind the polite reason lay fear of an enemy and no trust in God. People can colour their motives before others, never before God.
- Sin. The wrong lay in three words: "like all the nations." Asking to look like everyone else gave up their standing as God's people.
- Plan. God had already provided for a king in the law. Waiting in faith would have brought them David, not a king given in anger.
- Response. Samuel prayed instead of arguing. That is the model when what God's people do displeases us.
And the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed to Jehovah.
Israel's elders have just asked for a king, and the request lands on an old man who has judged them all his life. Samuel does not argue back; he is grieved, and he prays — so what did he hear in their words?
Samuel could have taken the demand personally. It came wrapped in a complaint about his age and his sons. One writer points to a different cause for his grief, and to what he did with it.
It displeased him. It was not so much that they had insulted him personally, for a man of his spirit and piety could bear that well. He was displeased because he saw in it rebellion against God, and he knew the certain consequences that must come of it. But he had a sure resource. It was a refuge he had long known, and it had never failed him — "he prayed." This was his comfort and consolation. His prayer is not given to us, but the record of God's answer is.
Writers weigh the motives differently. One grants that the slight to Samuel was real, and adds that the reason the people gave was not the reason they had.
The fact was that they asked for a king through unbelief. They first gave a different reason: Samuel was old, and his sons did not walk in his ways. That was not what really made them anxious to have a king. Samuel was, it is true, displeased at their request. It seemed like a personal slight in his eyes. In part that was true. But God showed him that Israel was only acting here as they had acted ever since they came out of Egypt. Far worse than the personal slight put on Samuel was their rejection of the Lord as their King. What triggered their request was the invasion of Israel's territory east of Jordan by Nahash, king of the Ammonites. Their words clearly showed distrust of the Lord's care for them and His interest in them. Unbelief really lay at the bottom of that popular movement.
The elders had attacked both Samuel's family and the arrangement he had set up. He answered neither charge.
The bearing of the man of God at this moment was delightful. He showed no resentment at the charges made against his sons. He made no effort to prop up the order he had so wrongly set up. "Samuel prayed to the LORD." How different everything would have been if he had prayed before he made his sons judges. Is it our holy habit to take everything to God in prayer? Have we really learned that we are utterly dependent on Him for every step?
Prayer did not make the problem go away. Another writer draws the lesson for us, and notes what the answer gave Samuel and what it did not.
It is beautiful to see how Samuel turns in all this to God. His heart is grieved at what the people have asked. Samuel prayed to the LORD. When we hear of weakness in others, we do well to bring it before God and pour it out there. That is better than a feeble attempt to reprove or correct it by our own efforts. He gets, in a certain sense, comfort from God, and yet no relief in the ordinary sense of the word.
Samuel's displeasure was right, yet the thought of a king did not start with Israel. Two things belong together here.
So the thought of a king was not from man, but from God. Yet the desire for a king like the nations had was rebellion against God on man's part. The king He intended would be a rich blessing from God. He purposed to give them a king before their wicked heart ever wanted one as a way to be rid of Himself. In man the desire was an evil that God must judge. In God it was grace to purpose the king, and He will surely bring it to pass. Both are true; but man's mind often sets one against the other, instead of believing both.
- Request. Israel asked for a king out of unbelief. Samuel's age and his sons were their excuse, not their motive.
- Grief. The insult to himself was not what hurt Samuel. He saw rebellion against God in the demand, and he knew what would follow.
- Prayer. Samuel did not defend himself or prop up the arrangement he had wrongly made. He prayed. God had never failed him yet.
- Pattern. When we meet weakness in others, pour it out before God rather than try to correct it by our own efforts.
- Purpose. Man's desire was evil, and God had to judge it. Yet the king was God's own purpose of grace. Believe both, instead of setting one against the other.
And Jehovah said to Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.
Israel's elders ask the aging Samuel for a king. He takes it as a personal defeat. God's reply tells him whose throne the people are really refusing. It also raises a hard question: what happens when God says yes to a request He disapproves of?
Until this moment Israel had no human king. God ruled them directly. The demand for a king set that aside.
It was in the days of Samuel that the people asked him to make them a king over them. They were tired of being under the direct government of God, who from time to time appointed judges over them. They wanted to be like the nations around them. This displeased Samuel, and he prayed to Jehovah. What was the answer of Jehovah to him? "…they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me from being king over them." This is very plain. Up to this time the government of Israel had been a pure theocracy. God was their King.
Samuel's sons had been judging corruptly, and that is the reason the elders gave. God's answer looks past it.
There we find the turned-away heart of Israel. It had been drifting from the Lord ever since He brought them out of Egypt. Now it sought still greater distance from Him, and wanted a king instead of Him. The bad government of Samuel's sons at this time was their excuse, but it was only an excuse. There is no doubt that they did act corruptly... But the Lord discloses the real source of this desire for a king.
What they wanted underneath the request was room to move.
The sin was not in the idea of a king. It was in the motive.
So the thought of a king was not from man, but from God. Yet the desire for one like the nations was rebellion against God on man's part. The king God planned would be a rich blessing from Him. He purposed to give them a king before their wicked heart wanted one to get rid of Him. In man it was an evil that God must judge. In God it was grace to purpose it, and He will surely carry it out as well. Both are true; but man's mind often sets one against the other, instead of believing both.
The same sentence that names Israel's sin also lifts the weight off Samuel's shoulders.
What precious encouragement God gave His servant! It came at the very moment when Samuel was going through a discipline, and the elders of Israel had become the instruments of it. Nothing could comfort his heart more than this assurance: he was, after all, on the Lord's side. And now that the people had rejected the Lord, Samuel too had to be rejected. Is it not an honour to share the shame that the world throws on our Lord when it spurns Him?
The principle reaches past Samuel to anyone carrying God's message.
To reject a servant who is really sent out by the Lord, and who is doing His will, and is standing for Him, is to reject the Lord Himself... Blessed is that servant who, through grace, is so hidden behind his Lord that he is lost in the Lord's objects and interests, and thinks only of HIS honour and HIS claims.
God tells Samuel to listen to them. That permission is not approval.
God, however, tells Samuel to listen to their voice. They were completely set on having a king, whatever God might say about it, so He let them have their way. It was as with the quails in the wilderness: "He gave them what they asked, but sent a wasting disease among them" (Ps. 106:15; 78:29). "As sometimes He crosses us in love, so at other times He gratifies us in wrath," Matthew Henry remarks.
Samuel's experience was a small copy of something far larger.
Samuel must expect the same treatment from the nation as God Himself had received. Whoever stands with God must feel what the psalmist felt: "The reproaches of those who reproach You have fallen on me." Man's hatred of God has never appeared more fully than in the cross of our blessed Lord Jesus.
- Rejection. The elders blamed Samuel's sons. But the refusal went to the top: they were pushing God off His throne as King.
- Reason. They wanted to be "like the nations." God's rule felt restrictive. National pride looked better.
- Relief. The same word that exposed Israel set Samuel free. The insult was not his to carry. To be rejected alongside a rejected God is an honour.
- Request granted. God said yes, and the yes was the judgment — He crosses us in love, and sometimes gratifies us in wrath.
- Repeated. What Israel did to God here reached its full height at the cross. Yet man's sin never cancelled God's own purpose of a king.
According to all the deeds that they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day, in that they have forsaken me and served other gods, so do they also unto thee.
God tells Samuel that the demand for a king was not a new failure but the latest form of an old one, going back to the day He brought Israel out of Egypt. So what had Israel been rejecting all those years, and why did God let them have their king?
Before Israel had a king, God Himself ruled the nation. He also gave the people a way to stay in touch with Him.
God Himself was their king, just as God Himself points out to Samuel (1 Sam. 8:7-8; 12:12). The priest was the point of contact, the bond between the people and God. And God raised up judges whenever the people needed them.
The words "from the day I brought them up out of Egypt" put this demand at the end of a long line. God is not judging one bad day. He is reading a record.
The Lord shows here that the demand for a king was only the climax of centuries of discontent with the position in which His grace had set them. It seems they faced the threat of an Ammonite invasion at the time (1 Sam. 12:12). They forgot the lesson of Ebenezer altogether (1 Sam. 7:12), and they turn, not to God, but to human strength. We see something similar in Judges 11. There too the Ammonites were attacking them. In their distress they turned to Jephthah for help. When will people — when will we — learn to turn to God alone in the difficulties and dangers of life?
The verse ties the demand for a king to "serving other gods." One motive lies under both.
No doubt they felt that the restraints of God's holy law were irritating. They had already gone after the gods of the nations, because that worship allowed them licence. So now they want a king "like the nations," to give them "larger freedom," as they thought. Not freedom for the practice of holiness, but freedom to feed their national vanity and political glory — "a place in the sun," as we would say today.
Being unlike everyone else was not Israel's embarrassment. It was the very thing that marked them out.
"Like all the nations" (verse 5) were truly painful words from the lips of the Lord's chosen people. It was their glory, if only they could have appreciated it, that they were not like the nations. Remember what Balaam said about them in the first of his four parables. He said, "Behold, a people dwelling alone, and not counting itself among the nations" (Num. 23:9). The people of God have always found it hard to keep the position of separation to God.
God's words "so they are also doing to you" put Samuel on His own side of the line.
This was a precious encouragement from God to His servant. It came at the very moment when Samuel was going through a discipline, and the elders of Israel had become its instruments. Nothing could comfort his heart more than this assurance: he was, after all, on the Lord's side. And now that the Lord had been rejected, Samuel had to be rejected too. Is it not an honour to share the shame that the world throws on our Lord when it spurns Him?... Even while He is disciplining him, God identifies Samuel with Himself. The people, meanwhile, looked like they were judging evil, but they were identifying themselves with the nations.
Israel's demand was sin. Yet a king was God's own thought, and commentators hold both facts together.
The thought of a king was not from man, but from God; yet the desire for one like the nations was rebellion against God on man's part... It was an evil in man to be judged; it was grace in God to plan it, and He will surely carry it out. Both are true; but man's mind often sets one against the other, instead of believing both... Samuel feels it deeply, not because it was against himself so much as against God... "And Samuel prayed." Oh that we might follow the pattern of so true a servant! When things displease us, may we pray, and not fret or fume or scold!
- Rejected King. God Himself ruled Israel. The priest was the link, and judges came when needed. Asking for a king meant refusing that rule.
- Rejected Repeatedly. This was not one bad day. It was the peak of centuries of discontent, the same instinct that made them serve other gods after Egypt.
- Rejected Restraint. Under the stated reasons lay a wish to be free of God's holy law and to gain the standing other nations had.
- Rejected Together. God tells Samuel the rejection is His, not Samuel's. He ties His servant to Himself in the moment of discipline.
- Rejected, Yet Overruled. A king was always God's own plan. He judges man's evil, and His plan still stands. Samuel's answer to it all was prayer, not complaint.
And now hearken unto their voice; only, testify solemnly unto them, and declare unto them the manner of the king that shall reign over them.
God tells Samuel to give the people the king they are demanding. But the permission carries a condition. Samuel must first warn them what such a king will cost them.
God's yes here is not approval. One writer asks why God commanded it at all, and finds the answer in the state of Israel's heart.
The Lord commanded Samuel to listen to the voice of the people, and make them a king. Was it that He approved of the plan? Most surely not; on the contrary, He declares plainly that it was a positive rejection of Himself. Why then command Samuel to appoint a king? He gave the command because of Israel's condition. They were growing tired of depending entirely on an unseen arm, and they longed for an arm of flesh.
Some prayers God answers as an act of judgment. Here He orders a warning first, so that no one can later plead ignorance.
Some prayers have to be granted, but in judgment. So it is with this prayer for a king. Yet God takes care to make even self-deception nearly impossible. They are to have testimony from the Lord Himself about what everything around them showed plainly as well — the manner of this king that they desired. He instructs Samuel to declare all this to them, so that they decide in the plainest light that can be given.
God had answered a demand like this once before, in the wilderness.
Samuel, however, is told to listen to their voice. Their minds were made up: they would have a king, whatever God might say about it. So He let them have their way. It was as with the quails in the wilderness: "He gave them their request, but sent leanness into their soul" (Psalm 106:15).
The writer quotes an older translation of Psalm 106:15 here. The ESV reads, "he gave them what they asked, but sent a wasting disease among them."
So Samuel spells out what this king will do once he holds power.
In answer to the people's demand for a king, Samuel gave them the Lord's message. It sets out in vivid terms what man in power is. The words "he will take" come back six times, with a dull monotony. The king would need their sons for the army. Their daughters must become his cooks. He would demand the produce of their fields and their flocks for his own support, and so on. It could hardly be otherwise. How else could the kingdom keep its dignity and majesty? In Israel's most prosperous days this became unbearable.
The people's rejection gave Samuel the new work this verse assigns him. Its lesson reaches past Israel.
Samuel's rejection qualifies him for a new office: he gives a very clear testimony to what would happen to the people. The king that man's heart wanted would make them his instruments to carry out his plans. That yoke would be unbearable, yet they would not be able to shake it off. The world treats Christians the same way. It entirely disowns those who seek its help. It gives them nothing in exchange except a sense of their own wretchedness, with no compensation at all. The world does not grant its help unless one agrees to serve it.
Was a king wrong in itself? One writer answers by holding two facts together.
The thought of a king was not from man, but from God; yet the desire for one like the nations was rebellion against God on man's part. The king God purposed would be a rich blessing from Him. He purposed to give them a king before their wicked heart wanted one as a way to get rid of Him. It was an evil in man to be judged; it was grace in God to purpose what He will surely also carry out. Both are true; but man's mind often sets one against the other, instead of believing both.
- Listen — God told Samuel to grant the demand. That answered Israel's condition; it did not approve their plan.
- Warn — God spells out the cost first, leaving almost no room for self-deception.
- Take — one word repeats through the warning. Their king would take their sons, daughters, fields and flocks.
- Testify — Samuel's rejection became his new commission. The world follows the same pattern: it helps only those who agree to serve it.
- Fulfil — God had always purposed a king. Their sin in demanding one never cancelled the blessing He meant to give.
And Samuel spoke all the words of Jehovah to the people that asked of him a king.
God had just told Samuel to give the people the king they demanded — but to warn them first. So Samuel repeats every word, and the question is why God would grant a request and warn against it at the same time.
Samuel's record as a messenger is one of holding nothing back, even when the message costs him. It started when he was a boy, with a message of judgment against the sons of Eli, the priest who raised him:
As a boy he was afraid to give Eli God's solemn message of judgment against his sons. Yet Samuel told him everything and hid nothing from him. God had spoken out loud to Samuel, as He often did to prophets after this. Samuel had to speak fully, but only what God had given him to speak.
God did not simply hand over the request. He attached to it a description of what the people were buying, so that no one could later claim they had been misled.
There are prayers that have to be granted, but in judgment: so with this prayer for a king. But God takes care to make even self-deception almost impossible. They are to hear from the Lord Himself what everything around them already showed plainly — the ways of this king they wanted. Samuel is told to declare all of it to them, so their decision is made in the clearest light possible.
Samuel then spells out what this king will do. One word dominates the list, and the repetition is the point.
He would be a despot: fierce, cruel, a raiser of taxes, laying heavy, crushing burdens on the backs of the oppressed people. Without faith in God, he would be a militarist. He would take the best of their young men for his army, and a tenth of everything they produced to pay for his pomp and empty show... "He will take, he will take," Samuel says repeatedly — six times in seven verses. And what did he give them in return? "He will give," Samuel says, not to them, but "to his officers and to his servants."
The king in this warning is man's own choice. What does such a choice produce?
This is man's king, and such a king can hardly be anything more. It is impossible, in the nature of things, for him to be much different. On another occasion we shall find the perfect contrast in God's king, in every detail. For now it is only a question of their responsibility, though Samuel warns them fully.
Another writer sets Saul beside God's King, starting from what the names mean:
Saul means "asked," and he was "asked" of the people; Samuel means "asked of God." Saul would "take" (see 1 Samuel 8:10-18); this King will "give."
The people had set Samuel aside, yet he now speaks to them for God. One writer sees his rejection as the making of his testimony:
Samuel's rejection fits him for a new office: he testifies clearly about what would happen to the people. The king after man's own heart would use them as tools for his own plans. That yoke would be unbearable, and they would not be able to shake it off... In the same way, the world completely disowns Christians who look to it for help. It gives them nothing in return but a sense of their own misery, with nothing to make up for it. The world helps only those who agree to serve it.
The warning did not change their minds. What happens when people hear the full cost and still insist?
Yet once the solemn warning is given and the people repeat their desire, they are left — a solemn thought — left to their choice. They shall have what they ask, even though it starves their own souls. Our blessed God often lets us have our own way, so that He may show us how foolish it is.
- All the words. Samuel hides nothing. A true messenger delivers the message he received, not the one people want to hear.
- Full light. God grants the request only after spelling out its cost. Self-deception becomes almost impossible, and the people choose with open eyes.
- He will take. Six times in seven verses the king takes; what he gives goes to his own officers, never back to the people.
- The true King. The people asked for Saul, and Saul would take. God's King gives — the contrast this chapter sets up.
- Left to choose. Warned and unmoved, they get their own way. God often lets us have it, to show us where it leads.
And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you he will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, on his chariot and among his horsemen, and they shall run before his chariots;
Israel asked for a king like the other nations, and God told Samuel to give them one. But first Samuel had to spell out the cost, starting in verse 11 with their sons — drivers for his chariots, horsemen, and runners before his carriage.
The warning came from God, who already knew where this choice would lead.
God, knowing well the sad future for Israel, instructs Samuel to warn them plainly about what they must expect if they get the king they want. Samuel, a true prophet faithful to his Lord, tells the people all the words of the Lord. Their king would take their sons for his own servants. They would be chariot drivers and horsemen, trained for army service as both officers and privates, and set to making weapons of war… If people want such government, they must pay the costs.
One phrase runs through the whole speech. Watch who receives, and who never does.
"He will take, he will take," Samuel says repeatedly — six times in seven verses. And what did he give them in return? "He will give," Samuel says, not to them, but "to his officers and to his servants."
Taking a man's sons means taking the man. Samuel names the result plainly.
In brief, they will be slaves to their king. They will no longer be servants of God in that sense. They will no longer be free to work for their own profit. At any time their king may call them out to war, needless or not, just as his whim decides.
The problem is not one bad ruler. It is what a king of man's choosing will always be.
This is man's king, and such a king can hardly be anything more. In the nature of things it could not be much different.
A royal court costs money. The bill came due under Solomon's son.
How else could the kingdom keep up its dignity and majesty? In the highest days of Israel's prosperity this became intolerable. So we hear them saying to the son of Solomon, "Your father made our yoke heavy" (1 Kings 12:4). The greater the glory of the kingdom, the greater the burden on the people. It had to be so.
The prediction did not wait long for its proof.
We see him now acting in the way Samuel had warned of. He chooses three thousand men of Israel to wait on him and sends the rest home to their tents. He treats them as his property, with the right to do as he pleased with his own. "When Saul saw any strong man, or any valiant man, he took him to himself" — taking their sons and appointing them to himself, as Samuel had said. All his ways have the same tone of self-will, completely opposed to the manner of God's king that Moses laid down in Deuteronomy 17.
Another kind of king stands opposite Saul.
It is refreshing to turn from the description of man's king in 1 Samuel 8 to the gracious words of God's king in Psalm 132. Speaking of Zion He says, "I will abundantly bless her provisions; I will satisfy her poor with bread." He gave them a taste of this when He fed the hungry crowd in John 6… For ages kings had been greedy and cruel. How good for men to have found One who could be a giver to His people!
The same bargain goes on outside Israel. Ask the world for help, and it will want you in return.
A king after man's own heart would use them as tools for his own plans. The yoke would be unbearable, and they could not shake it off. In the same way, the world completely disowns Christians who seek its help. It gives them nothing in return except a sense of their own wretchedness. The world does not grant its help unless one consents to serve it. This is not the easy yoke and the light burden of the bondservant of Christ, but the anguish of cruel slavery.
- Warned — God did not refuse what they asked. He named the price first, so they chose with open eyes.
- Taken — "He will take" sounds six times in seven verses. The only giving goes to the king's officers, never back to the people.
- Conscripted — sons are taken for chariots, horsemen and runners. Free servants of God become one man's property.
- Inevitable — the problem is not one bad ruler but human rule itself. The greater the king's glory, the heavier the people's yoke.
- Contrasted — God's King satisfies His poor with bread. He gives instead of taking, and His yoke is light.
and [he will take them] that he may appoint for himself captains over thousands, and captains over fifties, and that they may plough his ground, and reap his harvest, and make his instruments of war and instruments of his chariots.
Israel had asked for a king, so they could be like the nations around them. God told Samuel to give them one — but first to spell out the cost. Verse 12 sits in the middle of that warning. The king would take their sons as army officers, as farm workers on his land, and as makers of his weapons.
God gave them what they asked for. He also made sure they could not later pretend they had not been told.
Some prayers have to be granted, but in judgment: so with this prayer for a king. Yet God takes care that even self-deception is almost impossible. They are to hear testimony from the Lord Himself about what everything around them also plainly showed — the manner of this king that they desired. Samuel must declare all this to them, so that they make their decision in the plainest light that can be given.
The demands are specific: army ranks, farm work, weapon-making. It adds up to the machinery of a state, staffed by other people's sons.
Their king would take their sons as his own servants. They would drive his chariots and ride as his horsemen. They would be trained for army service, both officers and privates. They would make instruments of war, and so on… If people want such government, they must pay the costs. Of course people will argue that all these things are necessary taxes, whether they like it or not. But the Lord warns them they will not like it. They would cry out for relief later on, but could not expect the Lord to give it.
Read the whole warning and one phrase keeps returning. The king's defining verb is not give but take.
The people demanded a king, and Samuel gave them the Lord's message in reply. It sets out in vivid terms what man in power is. There is monotony in the six times repeated words "he will take." The army would claim their sons. Their daughters must become his cooks. The king would demand the produce of their fields and their flocks for his own support, and so on. It could hardly be otherwise. How else could a kingdom keep up its dignity and majesty?… The greater the glory of the kingdom, the greater the burden on the people must be.
This is not a quirk of Saul in particular. It is what happens whenever a man receives both honour and office at once.
The testimony is, after all, simple enough. Man being what he is, you cannot give him honour without his debasing himself with it. Put him in a place of service, and he will serve himself first of all. Combine these two, as in the case of a king, and self will shine out in him in the fullest way. This is nothing strange, sadly, but the commonest experience. But here a people with the Lord Himself as King deliberately accepts the yoke of another!
The loss went past their sons. Their own work, and even the tenth that belonged to God, would go to the king.
They will no longer be servants of God in that sense, and no longer free to work for their own profit… The tenth part of their increase, the very same that the Lord claimed as His own, must be given to their king. In other words, they would bitterly regret their choice. They would find that they had passed from the perfect freedom of serving God into the bondage of human tyranny… A king does not have to be a tyrant. But human nature being what it is, that is what should be expected. God's thought, after all, is for a king. But it must be the true King, who will reign in righteousness. In all the universe of God there is only One such King. When He comes whose right it is to rule, and the government is upon His shoulders, oppression will cease.
The pattern outlives the monarchy. Anyone who looks to the world for backing finds the same terms of trade.
The king who suited man's heart would use them as tools to carry out his plans. That yoke would be unbearable, and they would not be able to shake it off. In the same way, the world completely disowns Christians who seek its help. It gives them nothing in return except a sense of their own misery, with no compensation at all. The world does not grant its help unless one consents to serve it. This is not the easy yoke and the light burden of the bondservant of Christ, but the anguish of cruel slavery.
- Warned — God gave them the king they asked for. But first He made the cost so plain that they could not fool themselves.
- Taken — "He will take" runs six times through the warning. Sons become officers, ploughmen and weapon-makers for a man who gives nothing back.
- Why — Give a man honour and office together, and he serves himself first. That is the commonest experience, not a surprise.
- Cost — Even the tenth that belonged to God would go to the king. Freedom in God's service turned into bondage under human tyranny.
- Contrast — The world still helps only those who agree to serve it. Only the true King reigns in righteousness, and under Him oppression ends.
And he will take your daughters for perfumers, and cooks, and bakers.
God told Samuel to give Israel the king they asked for, but first to spell out what that king would cost them. Verse 13 moves the price from the sons to the daughters: the king will take the women of the house to work in his palace.
In Israel, cooking and baking were not trades but ordinary household work:
In Egypt the king had a male servant who is called his "chief baker" (Genesis 40:1-22; Genesis 41:10). But in Israel the women of each house did the baking. Abraham called to Sarah to prepare cakes on the hearth (Genesis 18:6). And Samuel said that if the Israelites had a king, he would take their daughters to be bakers (1 Samuel 8:13).
One writer counts the repetition and sees no way around it:
There is a dull sameness in the words "he will take," repeated six times. The army would claim their sons. Their daughters must become his cooks. The king would demand the produce of their fields and their flocks to support himself, and so on. It could hardly be any other way. How else could the Kingdom keep up its dignity and majesty? … The greater the glory of the Kingdom, the greater the burden on the people must be.
Samuel's warning rests on something ordinary about men and power:
The testimony is, after all, simple enough. Man being what he is, give him honour and he will debase himself with it. Put him in a place of service, he will serve himself first of all. Combine these two, as in the case of a king, self will shine out in him in the fullest way. This is nothing strange, alas, but the commonest experience. But here a people with Jehovah Himself as King deliberately accepts the yoke of another!
The king does give — but not to the people who pay:
And what did he give them in return? "He will give," Samuel says — not to them, but "to his officers and to his servants." Their part was to pay, and to hand over to his royal demands their finest young men and their daughters: Zion's fair daughters, set to slave in his kitchens as cooks and bakers.
Another writer names what the nation traded away:
The tenth of their increase, the very part that Jehovah claimed as His own, must now go to their king. In other words, they would bitterly regret their choice. They would find that they had passed from the perfect freedom of serving God into the bondage of human tyranny.
God answered the request, but He made sure nobody could later claim they had not been told.
Some prayers have to be granted, but in judgment. So it is with this prayer for a king. God takes care that even self-deception shall be barely possible. They are to hear from the Lord Himself what everything around them showed plainly as well — the manner of this king that they desired. Samuel must declare all this to them, so that they choose in the plainest light that can be given.
One writer carries the warning over to the world Christians live in:
The king that man's heart wanted would make them tools to carry out his plans. That yoke would be unbearable, and they would not be able to shake it off. In the same way, the world completely disowns Christians who seek its help. It gives them nothing in exchange except a sense of their own wretchedness, and no compensation at all. The world does not grant its help unless one consents to serve it. This is not the easy yoke and the light burden of the bondservant of Christ, but the anguish of cruel slavery.
Against the king who takes cooks and bakers stands a King who gives:
It is refreshing to turn from the description of man's king in 1 Samuel 8 to the gracious words of God's king in Psalm 132. Speaking of Zion He says, "I will abundantly bless her provisions; I will satisfy her poor with bread." In the day of John 6 He gave them a taste of this. He saw the starving crowds around Him and opened His generous hand. With five barley loaves and two small fish He met the need of five thousand men, besides women and children — and twelve baskets of fragments were left over. Do we wonder that the people sought to take Him by force and make Him King? How delightful for men, after ages of royal greed and oppression, to have found One who could be a giver to His people!
- Take. Samuel repeats the same two words six times. Verse 13 turns them on the daughters: home work becomes palace service.
- Self. Give a man honour and a place of service, and he will serve himself first. The outcome was no surprise.
- Give. The one thing this king gives, he gives to his officers and servants, not to the people who paid for it.
- Trade. The tenth that belonged to God now goes to a man. Freedom in God's service becomes bondage under human power.
- Contrast. God's King is a giver — He satisfies the poor with bread, and the crowds who tasted it wanted to crown Him.
And your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, the best, will he take and give to his servants.
Israel wanted a king like the other nations, and God told Samuel to spell out the cost first. Verse 14 moves past their sons and daughters to the land itself — the best of it, handed to the king's men.
Samuel builds his whole speech on one repeated verb. The repetition is the point. This is not one bad ruler, but what power does in human hands.
In answer to the people's demand for a king, Samuel gave them Jehovah's message, which sets out in vivid terms what man in power is. The words "he will take" come six times over, with a dull sameness. Their sons would have to serve in the army. Their daughters must become his cooks. The king would demand the produce of their fields and flocks for his support, and so on. It could hardly be any different. How else could the Kingdom keep up its dignity and majesty? In the highest days of Israel's prosperity this became unbearable.
The verse has two halves, and the second stings more. What the king takes does not come back to the people. It goes to the men around his throne.
"He will take, he will take," Samuel says repeatedly — six times in seven verses. And what did he give them in return? "He will give," Samuel says, not to them, but "to his officers and to his servants."
Losing a field was not only an economic loss. It moved Israel out of one service and into another.
Their property will not be safe from his aggression. Their lands can be taken away. They must hand their king the tenth part of their increase — the very tenth that Jehovah claimed as His own. In other words, they would deeply regret their choice. They would find that they had passed from the perfect freedom of serving God into the bondage of human tyranny. How fully this was verified in later years, a glance at their history will show.
History proved the warning. Generations later a king wanted a vineyard, and God's law about family land stood in his way.
Ahab well knew that an Israelite could not sell the inheritance of his fathers. But what of that? Was not Ahab "king of Samaria"? Why should an old divine law keep him from what he wanted?
God did not let the people stumble into this blindly. He told them the cost in advance, so they could not even fool themselves.
There are prayers that have to be granted, but in judgment: so with this prayer for a king. But care is taken that even self-deception shall be almost impossible. They are to hear testimony from the Lord Himself about what everything around them also showed plainly — the kind of king they wanted. Samuel must declare all this to them, so that they may decide in the plainest light that can be given.
The pattern outlives Israel. Anyone who looks to the world for help discovers the same terms of trade.
The king after man's own heart would use them as tools to carry out his plans. That yoke would be unbearable, yet they would not be able to shake it off. In the same way, the world completely disowns Christians who seek its help. It gives them nothing in exchange except a sense of their own misery, with nothing at all to make up for it. The world does not grant its help unless one consents to serve it. This is not the easy yoke and the light burden of the bondservant of Christ, but the anguish of cruel slavery.
Set beside Saul, the true King acts on the opposite verb.
How very different this King is to Saul! Saul means "asked," and the people "asked" for him. Samuel means "asked of God." Saul would "take" (see 1 Samuel 8:10-18); this King will "give."
After a long line of rulers who only took, that contrast comes as a relief.
How delightful for men, after ages of kingly greed and oppression, to have found One Who could be a giver to His people!
- Take. Six times in seven verses Samuel says "he will take." The dull repetition shows what man in power is, not just what one man did.
- Give. The king does give, but "not to them" — the seized fields go to his officers and servants.
- Lose. Their property is not safe. The tenth that belonged to God goes to the king, and freedom under God becomes bondage under a man.
- Warned. God granted the prayer, but in judgment. He told them the cost first, so Israel chose in the plainest light possible.
- Contrast. Saul takes; the true King gives. After ages of kingly greed, men found One Who could be a giver to His people.
And he will take the tenth of your seed and of your vineyards, and give to his chamberlains and to his servants.
Israel asked for a king "like all the nations," and God told Samuel to give them one — but not before spelling out the bill. This verse is one line on that bill: a tenth of the harvest, collected from the people and handed to the king's men.
Samuel's whole speech turns on one repeated verb.
In answer to the people's demand for a king, Samuel gave them Jehovah's message. It sets out in vivid terms what man in power is. There is a monotony in the six times repeated words "he will take." He would take their sons for the army. Their daughters must become his cooks. He would demand the produce of their fields and of their flocks for his own support, and so on. It could hardly be otherwise. How else could the Kingdom keep up its dignity and majesty? … The greater the glory of the Kingdom, the greater the burden on the people, of necessity.
The amount named here was not a random tax rate.
Their property will not be safe from his aggression either. He can take their lands away. The tenth part of their increase — the very same that Jehovah claimed as His own — must go to their king. In other words, they would bitterly regret their choice. They would find that they had passed from the perfect freedom of serving God into the bondage of human tyranny.
The verse has a taking and a giving in it, and they do not point the same way.
He would demand a tenth of all they produced to support all this pomp and empty show. … "He will take, he will take," Samuel says repeatedly — six times in seven verses. And what did he give them in return? "He will give," Samuel says — not to them, but "to his officers and to his servants." Their part was to pay. They handed over to his kingly demands their "goodliest young men" and their "daughters."
God answered their prayer, but He made sure they knew the cost first.
There are prayers God has to grant, but in judgment: so with this prayer for a king. Yet He takes care that even self-deception shall be hardly possible. The Lord Himself gives them His testimony about the manner of this king that they desired — the same thing everything around them showed plainly. He instructs Samuel to declare all this to them, so that they may decide in the plainest light that can be given.
They heard it all and still said yes.
Samuel bears the solemn witness, the people repeat their desire, and then — solemn thought — they are left to their choice. They shall have their request, even though it brings leanness to their own souls. Our blessed God often permits us to have our own way, so that He may show us the folly of it.
Commentators apply this beyond Israel, to anyone who looks to the world for help.
The king according to man's heart would make them his instruments to carry out his plans. That yoke would be unbearable, but they would be unable to shake it off. In the same way, the world entirely disowns Christians who seek its help. It gives them nothing in exchange except a sense of their own wretchedness, with no compensation at all. The world does not grant its help unless one consents to serve it. This is not the easy yoke and the light burden of the bondservant of Christ, but the anguish of cruel slavery.
Set beside this verse, there is one King whose reign runs the opposite way.
It is refreshing to turn from the description of man's king in 1 Samuel 8 to the gracious words of God's king in Psalm 132. Speaking of Zion He says, "I will abundantly bless her provisions; I will satisfy her poor with bread." In the day of John 6 He gave them a taste of this. He saw the starving crowds around Him and opened His generous hand. With five barley loaves and two small fish He fed five thousand men, besides women and children. Twelve baskets of pieces were left over. How delightful for men, after ages of kingly greed and oppression, to have found One who could be a giver to His people!
- Take. Six times over, Samuel's warning turns on one verb. A king of man's choosing takes, because somebody must pay for his glory.
- Take God's tenth. The portion named is the very tenth Jehovah claimed as His own — the king would collect what was already God's.
- Take, then give elsewhere. The tenth leaves the people and goes to the king's officers and servants. Nothing comes back.
- Told, and still willing. Samuel read the price out first, so no one could fool himself. They still chose the king.
- The one King who gives. Man's king takes the harvest; God's King says of Zion, "I will satisfy her poor with bread" — a giver, not a collector.
And he will take your bondmen, and your bondwomen, and your comeliest young men, and your asses, and use them for his work.
Israel demanded a king. God told Samuel to give them one, but first to spell out the price. By this verse the list has reached past their sons, daughters and fields, down to their servants, their best young men and even their animals. What does it cost to be ruled by a man instead of by God?
One writer counts how often a single verb comes back in Samuel's speech:
In answer to the people's demand for a king, Samuel gave them Jehovah's message. It sets out in vivid terms what man in power is. There is a monotony in the six times repeated words "he will take." He would need their sons for the army. Their daughters must become his cooks. The produce of their fields and their flocks would go to the king's support, and so on. It could scarcely be otherwise. How else could the king keep up the dignity and majesty of his kingdom? In Israel's most prosperous days this became unbearable. So we hear the people say to Solomon's son, "Your father made our yoke heavy" (1 Kings 12:4). The greater the glory of the Kingdom, the greater the burden upon the people of necessity.
The verse ends with "put them to his work." So what kind of king was this, and what did he ever give back?
This was not God's ideal of what a king should be. It was the manner of the king of their own choice, given to them as a punishment for their deliberate rejection of God's rule through Samuel. Without faith in God, he would be a pronounced militarist, taking the choicest of their young men to fill the ranks of his standing army. And what did he give them in return? "He will give," Samuel says, not to them, but to his officers and to his servants. Their part was to pay, and to hand over their best young men and their daughters to his kingly demands. The Philistines slaughtered the boys, through Saul's mismanagement.
The problem runs deeper than one bad king. It is what man does with honour and office:
The testimony is, after all, simple enough. Man being what he is, honour cannot be given him without his debasing himself with it. Put him in a place of service, and he will serve himself first of all. Combine these two, as in the case of a king, and self will shine out in him in the fullest way. This is nothing strange, sadly, but the commonest experience. But here a people with Jehovah Himself as King deliberately accepts the yoke of another!
God did not let Israel choose in the dark. Samuel had to read the whole list out first:
There are prayers that have to be granted, but in judgment: so with this prayer for a king. But care is taken that even self-deception shall be hardly possible. The Lord Himself testifies about the kind of king they wanted — the very thing everything around them already showed plainly. Samuel must declare all this to them, so they decide in the plainest light possible.
For Israel this was more than a financial loss. It was a change of master:
The tenth part of their increase, the very same that Jehovah claimed as His own, must be given to their king. In other words, they would deeply regret their choice. They had left the perfect freedom of serving God, and passed into the bondage of human tyranny.
The same bargain is offered to anyone today who looks to the world for help:
The world completely disowns Christians who seek its help. It gives them nothing in return but a sense of their own wretchedness, and no compensation at all. The world does not grant its help unless one agrees to serve it. This is not the easy yoke and the light burden of the bondservant of Christ, but the anguish of cruel slavery.
Against this taker stands another King:
It is refreshing to turn from the description of man's king in 1 Samuel 8 to the gracious words of God's king in Psalm 132. Speaking of Zion He says, "I will abundantly bless her provisions; I will satisfy her poor with bread." In John 6 He gave them a taste of this. He saw the starving crowds around Him and opened His generous hand. With five barley loaves and two small fish He satisfied the need of five thousand men. After ages of greed and oppression from kings, how delightful for men to find One who could be a giver to His people!
- Cause — Israel demanded a king of their own choosing, and God gave them one as a punishment. Power in human hands serves itself first.
- Warning — God spelled out every loss in advance. He let them see the bill before they signed.
- Taking — Six times over: "he will take." Sons, daughters, fields, servants, best young men, animals. The repetition is the message.
- Giving — What the king gives, he gives to his own officers and servants, never back to the people who paid.
- Result — They traded the freedom of serving God for the bondage of human rule. Only God's King gives; He satisfies His people instead of stripping them.
He will take the tenth of your sheep. And ye shall be his servants.
Samuel's warning reaches its lowest point here. The king has already taken sons, daughters, fields and servants. Now he takes a tenth of the flocks — and then the people themselves. Can a people hand themselves to a man and still be free?
Samuel repeats one verb. One commentator counts it, then asks what the king ever gives back.
"He will take, he will take," Samuel says repeatedly — six times in seven verses. And what did he give them in return? "He will give," Samuel says, not to them, but "to his officers and to his servants." Their part was to pay, and to hand over their best young men and their daughters to meet the king's demands.
The fraction named is not random. A tenth of the increase already belonged to God, and the king's claim falls on that very portion.
Then, too, their property will not be safe from his aggression. Their lands can be taken away. The tenth part of their increase, the very same that Jehovah claimed as His own, must be given to their king. In other words, they would bitterly regret their choice. They would find that they had passed out of the perfect freedom of serving God into the bondage of human tyranny.
The last clause is where the whole list has been heading. One writer reads it as a yoke no one can throw off, and as a warning to anyone who looks to the world for help.
The king chosen after man's own heart would use them as tools to carry out his plans. That was an unbearable yoke, and one they could not shake off. In the same way, the world completely disowns Christians who look to it for help. It gives them nothing in return except a sense of their own misery. The world does not grant its help unless one consents to serve it. This is not the easy yoke and the light burden of the bondservant of Christ, but the anguish of cruel slavery.
Samuel is not predicting one bad man. He is describing what honour and office do to any man.
Man being what he is, you cannot give him honour without his debasing himself with it. Put him in a place of service, and he will serve himself first of all. Combine the two, as in a king, and self shows itself in him to the full. Sadly, this is nothing strange; it is the commonest experience of all. Yet here is a people with Jehovah Himself as King, and they deliberately accept the yoke of another!
Israel gets the full price list before it chooses. No one can claim surprise later.
If people want such government, they must pay the costs. Of course people will easily argue that all these things are necessary taxes, whether the people like it or not. But the Lord warns them that they will not like it. In the end they would cry out for relief, and could not expect the Lord to give it. They would have to learn deeply the results of their own wilfulness.
The warning came true.
How fully this was proved in later years, a glance at their history will show. Even David, in his terrible sin, showed how arbitrary a king's power is — a royal murderer, against whom no hand could be lifted in vengeance! Solomon's oppression, and the open robbery and murder by Ahab, are only illustrations of what was, no doubt, all too common among the kings of Israel.
Man's king takes. One writer turns from him to God's King.
It is refreshing to turn from the description of man's king in 1 Samuel 8 to the gracious words of God's king in Psalm 132. Speaking of Zion He says, "I will abundantly bless her provision; I will satisfy her poor with bread." In John 6 He gave them a taste of this. He saw the starving crowds around Him. He opened His generous hand, and with five barley loaves and two small fish He met the need of five thousand men. After ages of greedy and oppressive kings, what a delight for men to find One who could be a giver to His people!
- Take. Six times in seven verses the king "will take". What he gives goes to his officers and servants, never back to the people.
- Take God's tenth. A man now takes the very portion the Lord claimed as His own — the clearest sign of who has replaced whom.
- Take you. The list ends with the people themselves. They trade the freedom of serving God for a yoke they cannot shake off.
- Taking is what power does. Give a man honour and office together, and self takes over. This was predictable, not a surprise.
- The King who gives. God's King blesses Zion's provision and satisfies her poor with bread. He is a giver, not a taker — the answer to everything Samuel warned about.
And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king whom ye have chosen; and Jehovah will not answer you in that day.
Samuel's last warning is not about what a king would do to Israel's enemies, but what he would do to Israel. It raises the hardest question in the chapter: why would God refuse to hear a suffering people?
The problem was never kingship itself, but whose king it would be. Israel wanted a ruler on their own terms and would not wait for God's.
Israel's rebellious will was to have, as they said, "our" king. They would not wait for the King Jehovah purposed, whom He will set in His own time on His holy hill of Zion. They refused both protest and warning, so God gave them their king in His anger. Yet He gave one "on whom was all the desire of Israel" — the people's choice indeed, not the one after God's own heart.
Samuel's warning turns on one verb, said over and over. One writer counts it.
"He will take, he will take," Samuel says — six times in seven verses. And what did he give them in return? "He will give," Samuel says, not to them, but "to his officers and to his servants." Their part was to pay, and to hand over their finest young men and their daughters to meet the king's demands.
The refusal to hear belongs to God's government, the working out of consequences. One writer sets it beside a later moment when God did hear His people.
Through Samuel He had told them in the plainest terms what would come (8:18). When they groaned under the oppression of their self-chosen king, they would cry out in their distress, and He would not hear them. Yet here He says, "their cry has come to Me." The first was in government, and they reap a bitter harvest from what they sowed by their own will. This is in grace, and He looks on His people's misery and purposes to deliver them. Their sufferings under His government came from a scourge within — from Saul their king. The groaning that drew out the compassion of His grace came from outside, from the Philistines, and He is quick to hear and ready to relieve. Let the grace encourage us; let the government warn us and put us on our guard.
God did not spring the consequence on them. Samuel went back and forth between the Lord and the people, and that gave them room to turn back.
But in His usual grace, the Lord here gives His people space to repent of this evil choice before they reaped its bitter fruit. He had done the same at Mount Sinai, where Moses passed back and forth between the people and the Lord, to give them room to turn and still trust the grace that had redeemed them from Egypt. And so here, I believe, Samuel passes again and again between the Lord and the people with the same intent. But as they listened at Sinai to their own heart in its confidence and self-sufficiency, so here they will have a king despite all God's gracious warning. They take their own way again.
The king they wanted would use them for his own ends. One writer applies this to Christians who look to the world for help.
The king according to man's heart would make them his instruments to carry out his plans. That was an unbearable yoke, but one they could not shake off (vv. 10-18). In the same way, the world completely disowns Christians who seek its help. It gives them nothing in exchange but a sense of their own wretchedness, and no compensation at all. The world does not grant its help unless you agree to serve it. This is not the easy yoke and light burden of the bondservant of Christ, but the anguish of cruel slavery.
Set against a king who takes, Scripture holds out another kind of rule entirely.
It is refreshing to turn from the description of man's king in 1 Samuel 8 to the gracious words of God's king in Psalm 132. Speaking of Zion He says, "I will abundantly bless her provisions; I will satisfy her poor with bread."... How delightful for men, after ages of greed and oppression under kings, to have found One who could be a giver to His people! But the Christ of God would not receive the Kingdom from men or from Satan. He will take it from the hand of God alone.
- Chosen. The sting is in the phrase "whom you have chosen for yourselves." God gave them the king their own will demanded, not the King He purposed.
- Taking. Samuel's warning turns on one verb, repeated six times. Their king would take their finest young men and daughters, and would give — but to his own officers and servants.
- Warned. God announced the consequence in advance and gave them room to repent. No one could later call it a surprise.
- Unheard. The silence belongs to God's government. They reap what they sowed by their own will. Yet His grace is quick to hear the cry caused by an enemy from outside.
- Contrast. Man's king takes, and his yoke will not come off. God's King gives, satisfies the poor with bread, and takes His kingdom from the hand of God alone.
And the people refused to hearken to the voice of Samuel; and they said, No, but there shall be a king over us,
Samuel has just spelled out what a king will cost them: their sons, their daughters, their fields and flocks. The people answer with a flat no. Their refusal raises the questions that shape the rest of Israel's history. What were they really asking for? Why did God let them have it? And what does a people lose when it wants to look like everyone else?
Samuel's warning changed nothing. One writer notes how each word of their reply exposed them further.
It was in vain. "But the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel. And they said, 'No! But there shall be a king over us, that we also may be like all the nations.'" Their heart was getting further and further away from God. Every word they uttered, though they little suspected it, condemned themselves the more. It was self-will at work against God. Worse still, they were deliberately throwing away their own highest privilege.
The people had blamed Samuel's age and his sons. One writer looks past that reason to what lay underneath.
The fact was that they asked for a king through unbelief. The first motive they put forward was that Samuel was old and his sons did not walk in his ways. That was not the real reason they were anxious to have a king... In self-will and unbelief they cried out for a king: "There shall be a king over us, that we also may be like all the nations, and that our king may judge us and go out before us and fight our battles." Their words showed that they did not trust the Lord's care for them, or His interest in them.
The people give two reasons for wanting a king. One writer weighs both and finds a loss in each.
They have no answer for the warning. They simply reply to Samuel, "No! But there shall be a king over us." They say it for two reasons. First, they want to be like the nations, just as many Christians today want to be like the world. Second, they expect a king to fight their battles for them. In both of these things they lose sight of God. How can they represent God before the nations if they choose to be like the nations? That would take away any real testimony to the difference God had made in them because of His love.
The people wanted a king they could see. One writer sets that beside the God who had already scattered the Philistines for them.
They began with a request: "Make us a king." They finish by declaring their determination: "No! But there shall be a king over us!" "That our king may fight our battles!" They spoke as if a king with his crown among them would guarantee them victory! Had they forgotten their great victory over the Philistine armies? "The LORD thundered with a mighty sound that day against the Philistines and threw them into confusion, and they were routed before Israel." Was "the LORD of hosts" no longer enough for them? They could not see Him, but a king, dressed in purple and gold and riding in a chariot, would be a fine sight for them to look at.
God does not overrule the demand. He answers it, and the answer itself becomes the lesson.
So God allows it. It is not only a concession to Israel's folly. He lets them have their way so that painful experience will teach them the results of that folly. Later God tells Israel, "I gave you a king in my anger, and I took him away in my wrath" (Hosea 13:11). Saul's beginning as king seemed promising, but his end was pitifully sad.
Another writer draws out the pastoral side of being handed what you insisted on: it was "nothing short of apostasy to desire a king like the nations," yet after the solemn warning "they are left — solemn thought — left to their choice... Our blessed God often permits us to have our own way, that He may show us the folly of it."
One writer sees more here than one nation's mistake. The refusal exposes the human heart itself.
The lesson was not for that generation only. Otherwise it would matter little. In all this testing of Israel... the test falls on man as man, and it uncovers the depths of his heart. The people's choice here is the same choice they made at a later day, when they cried, "Not this man, but Barabbas!" "They have rejected Me," says the LORD.
- Refusal. The people heard Samuel's full warning and still said no. Writers call it self-will at work against God, with every word condemning them further.
- Reason. They blamed Samuel's age and his sons. The real cause was unbelief — they did not trust the Lord's care for them.
- Request. They wanted to be like the nations and to have a king fight their battles. Both wishes lose sight of God and destroy the difference He had made in them.
- Result. God granted the demand, but in anger: "I gave you a king in my anger." He lets people have their way so that experience teaches them the folly of it. Yet He had His own Anointed One in view.
- Repeat. This is not one nation's old mistake. It is the human heart uncovered — the same choice cried out again later: "Not this man, but Barabbas!"
that we also may be like all the nations; and our king shall judge us, and go out before us, and conduct our wars.
Israel's leaders have asked Samuel for a king. Samuel has warned them what a king will cost. Verse 20 is their final answer. It lists what they want a king for — to judge them, to lead them out, to fight their wars. God had been doing all of that for them already.
Their reason comes in two parts. Both of them leave God out.
They have no answer for the warning, but reply to Samuel, "No; but we will have a king over us." Why? First, they want to be like the nations, just as many Christians today want to be like the world. Second, they expect a king to fight their battles for them. In both of these things they lose sight of God. How can they represent God before the nations if they choose to be like the nations? This would destroy any real witness to the difference God had made in them because He loved them. And in the past, who fought their battles for them when they won? See Exodus 14:13-14.
Wanting to look like everyone else was not a small preference. It cut against the very reason this nation existed.
Israel, as the people of Jehovah's gracious choice, was meant to be different in every respect from all others, and to be Jehovah's witness to them. Balaam, in his first speech, said, "Look, this is a people that will live alone, and will not be counted among the nations" (Num. 23:9). So it was a terrible thing when the people demanded of Samuel, "Make us a king to judge us like all the nations" (1 Sam. 8:5).
They blamed Samuel's age and his sons' corruption. That was not the real reason. Pressure from an enemy across the Jordan was.
They asked for a king through unbelief… Far worse than the personal slight to Samuel was the rejection of the Lord as their King. The immediate cause of their demand was the invasion of Israel's territory east of Jordan by Nahash, king of the children of Ammon (1 Sam. 12:12). Their words showed plainly that they did not trust the Lord's care for them, or His interest in them.
Notice how the request hardens as the chapter goes on — and how short their memory is. Only a chapter earlier, God had scattered the Philistines for them.
They began with a request: "Make us a king." They end with a demand: "No, but we will have a king!" "That our king may fight our battles!" — as if a king with a crown among them would guarantee them victory! "O foolish people, and unwise" — had they forgotten their great victory over the Philistine armies? The Lord "thundered with a great thunder upon them and threw them into confusion, and they were defeated before Israel." Was "the Lord of hosts" no longer enough for them? Him they could not see. But a king dressed in purple and gold lace, riding in a chariot, would be a grand sight to them.
The deepest problem was not that they wanted a king. It was the words "like all the nations." God already had His own king in view.
Their desire for a king was, in reality, giving up the Lord. It denied His direct rule through the judges. But their worst sin was asking for a king like the nations. Was it not God's counsel to give them a king according to His own heart, an Anointed whom He would have chosen for them Himself (1 Sam. 2:35; 1 Sam. 13:14)? Wanting a king like all the nations gave up their title as God's people and meant becoming like the world… Christendom, on its path of falling away, has acted the same way. Instead of humbling itself and mourning, it has looked to the world for support to keep itself going.
They asked for a man to go out before them. Read on into Saul's reign and you find the opposite happened.
When they did get a king, according to their hearts' desire, what did he do for them? "All the people followed him trembling."… His whole reign was a sad failure. The prophet Hosea sums it up in two striking sentences: "I gave you a king in my anger, and took him away in my wrath." In short, he was the answer to the unbelief and self-will of the people. So all their bright hopes about him ended in bitter disappointment. He failed to answer the mind of God, and so he failed to meet the people's need.
- The demand: They wanted a king to make them like the nations and to fight their battles. Both wants left God out.
- The root: They blamed Samuel's sons. The real cause was unbelief, brought out by Ammon's invasion across the Jordan.
- The loss: Israel was to live apart and be God's witness to the nations. Asking to look like them threw that witness away.
- The substitute: They traded a God they could not see for a king they could. Only a chapter earlier, the Lord had thundered against the Philistines for them.
- The result: God had His own anointed king in view. God gave the king they chose in anger, and the people followed him trembling.
And Samuel heard all the words of the people, and he repeated them in the ears of Jehovah.
Israel has just heard Samuel's warning about the cost of a king, and has dug in: they will have a king anyway. Samuel does not argue back — he carries every word they said straight to God.
Samuel had no one else to turn to. One writer sums up the verse:
Samuel has warned the people, but they refuse to listen to his voice. They prefer to follow their own pathway. Samuel has the Lord alone as his resource, and he repeats all the people's words in His ears.
This was no one-off reaction. Another writer sets Samuel beside a king who did the same with a letter:
He listens to their defiant words, and then, like the man of prayer that he was, he tells them into the ears of God. The good king Hezekiah did the same. When the messenger brought him the written words of the Assyrian, he went into the house of God and spread the letter out before Him. So Samuel here pours out before the LORD all the words of the stubborn people. He does not call them "rebels," as Moses did (Num. 20:10). In meekness he stays silent.
Samuel was not passing on a neutral request. Their own sentences gave them away:
Their heart was getting farther and farther away from God. Every word they uttered, though they little suspected it, condemned themselves the more. It was self-will active against God, and more, a deliberate giving up of their own highest privilege.
Anyone let down by people close to them faces the same choice. The instinct is to correct them; Samuel took it to God.
It is beautiful to see how Samuel turns in all this to God. His heart is grieved at what the people have asked... Samuel prayed to the LORD. It would be good for us, when we hear of weakness in others, to bring it before God and pour it out there, rather than try weakly to reprove or correct it by our own efforts. He gets, in a way, comfort from God, and yet no relief in the ordinary sense of the word. He must listen to the voice of the people in all that they say. Then the sad fact comes out: this same nation had treated the blessed God Himself in this very way from the beginning. Samuel must expect from the nation the same treatment God Himself had received.
Samuel had once set up his sons without asking God. Here he does nothing until God speaks.
So God has used discipline to strengthen His servant. He wants to make him an instrument of new blessings in what follows. Samuel had set up his sons without consulting the Lord. Taught now by God, he waits until God has told him: "Obey their voice and make them a king."
God's reply is a yes. That yes is not approval:
There are prayers that have to be granted, but in judgment: so with this prayer for a king. But God takes care that even self-deception is hardly possible. The Lord Himself will tell them what everything around them already showed — what this king they wanted would be like.
Being left to your own choice is itself the judgment:
The solemn witness is given, the people repeat their desire, and then — solemn thought — they are left to their choice. They shall have their request, even though it brings leanness to their own souls. Our blessed God often permits us to have our own way, so that He may show us the folly of it. How much better to learn His way in His own presence. A path of disobedience teaches the same lesson by bitter experience, and it brings sorrow to us and dishonour to His name.
- Heard. Samuel listened to defiant words without interrupting. He did not call the people rebels, as Moses once did. He stayed silent.
- Repeated. He carried what he heard into God's ears, as Hezekiah spread out the Assyrian's letter. There he found comfort, though no relief.
- Revealed. The words he repeated condemned the speakers. Every sentence showed self-will against God, and a deliberate giving up of their highest privilege.
- Waited. Samuel had once set up his sons without consulting God. Now he moved only after God spoke. Discipline had made him an instrument of new blessings.
- Granted. God grants some prayers in judgment. He let Israel have what they asked, and left them to their own choice — and that choice was the sorrow they had to learn from.
And Jehovah said to Samuel, Hearken unto their voice, and make them a king. And Samuel said to the men of Israel, Go ye every man to his city.
The chapter ends with God telling Samuel to do the very thing that grieved him: listen to the people and give them a king. So why does God say yes to something He has just called a rejection of Himself?
The command to appoint a king came in response to what the people had become, not because their plan was good.
The Lord commanded Samuel to listen to the voice of the people, and make them a king. (1 Sam. 8:22) Was it that He approved of the plan? Most surely not; on the contrary, He declares plainly that it was a positive rejection of Himself. Why then command Samuel to appoint a king? He gave the command because of Israel's condition. They were growing tired of depending completely on an unseen arm, and they longed for an arm of flesh. They wanted to be like the nations around them. They wanted a king who would go out in front of them and fight their battles for them. Well, God gave them what they asked, and they were very quickly made to learn how worthless their plan was.
God's own words to Samuel name the target of the insult, and He speaks them with striking gentleness toward the prophet who has been pushed aside.
They desire a king. Samuel feels it deeply, not because it was against himself so much as it was against God... "And the LORD said to Samuel, 'Obey the voice of the people in all that they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me.'" What a God of patience, to speak and act like that! Still, Samuel was to listen. How God moves in love above all man's evil, and carries out His own blessed plans!
This is the third time God tells Samuel to give way. Getting what you insist on can itself be the judgment.
Samuel, however, is told to listen to their voice. They were completely determined to have a king, whatever God might say about it. So He let them have their way. It was as with the quails in the wilderness, "He gave them their request; but sent leanness into their soul" (Ps. 106:15; 78:29). "As sometimes He crosses us in love, so at other times He gratifies us in wrath," Matthew Henry remarks.
Being handed over to your own choice is a real form of discipline, and writers here treat it as a mercy with a sting in it.
They shall have their request, even though it brings leanness to their own souls. Our blessed God often permits us to have our own way, so that He may show us the folly of it. If only we might learn His way in His own presence, and be spared the sorrow for ourselves and the dishonour to His name which come from the bitter experience of a path of disobedience.
The king they asked for would cost them, and that cost reaches beyond Israel.
The king that man's heart wanted would use them as tools to carry out his plans. That yoke would be unbearable, and they would not be able to shake it off (vv. 10-18). In the same way, the world completely disowns Christians who seek its help. It gives them nothing in exchange except a sense of their own wretchedness, with no compensation at all. The world does not grant its help unless one agrees to serve it. This is not the easy yoke and the light burden of the bondservant of Christ, but the anguish of cruel slavery.
Notice what the rejected servant does with the people's defiance — and what he does not do.
He listens to their defiant words, and then, like the man of prayer that he was, he tells them into the ears of God. Think of the good king Hezekiah. When the messenger brought him the letter from the Assyrian king, he went into the house of God and spread it out before Him. In the same way, Samuel pours out before Jehovah all the words of the obstinate people. He does not, like Moses, call them "rebels" (Num. 20:10), but meekly holds his peace. The third time Jehovah tells him to listen to their voice, he quietly sends the people home without a word of blame.
They go home with their wish granted.
A sad journey home! Each man goes back to his own city. They have deliberately refused to stay any longer under the gentle and loving rule of the only One who could truly rule them.
A king was never Israel's invention. God had shown His intention to bless through an anointed one before the people ever opened their mouths.
Man shows what he is in his desire to get rid of God. But Jehovah has His own plans. Carrying them out may depend on man's sinful failure and ruin. Even so, His purpose and end of blessing man is always before His own mind. That gives us great comfort.
- Asked — They wanted a king like the nations around them. They were tired of depending on an unseen God and longed for a human arm to fight for them.
- Rejected — God tells Samuel that the insult was aimed at Himself, not at the prophet. He says it with remarkable patience.
- Granted — The yes was not approval. As with the quails, He gave what they asked and sent leanness with it. Sometimes He grants in anger what He refuses in love.
- Paid — The yoke was real, and they could not shake it off. A king after man's heart turns his people into tools for his own plans.
- Overruled — Man works to be rid of God; God works to bless man. Man's failure may shape how that purpose unfolds, but not whether it stands.